University of Oregon HISTORY 580 Prof.

Robert Haskett Luz Romero 951097262

Mexico in the historiographic canon

Florescano, Enrique. National Narratives in Mexico: A History. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2006. Print.

In Historia de las historias de la nacion Mexicana (2002), Florescano studies the different interpretations of the past that were written in the official canon of Mexican history. The Mexican historiographic canon was developed thanks to interpretations of past that went on for several centuries. In Mexican historic narratives, there have been diverse interpretations of past, and some of them have taken up and almost ignored the traces of others. As a consequence, they became one that could be entitled as the Mexican historiographic canon; this unilateral interpretation was expanded and was taken as the most accurate perspective on historical facts by different generations. This macro narrative was the link between the past and the present, which established the meaning of Mexican nation. His book is divided in parts that correspond to the traditional periodization of history in time coordinates (coordenadas): The creation, the canon of the post-classic period, the western canon versus the Mesoamerican canon, the Conquest and the imposition of the Christian canon, the first European versions of the American world and the origin of the Mestizo chronicle, the canon of memory brought by the Ttulos primordiales, the creole homeland and the history of the nation, the collapse of the Republic to the history of the nation, the historical narrative coined by the post-revolutionary state, history by professionals of history.

The first chapters study the Mesoamerican canon, which includes narratives from 200650 a. C. They refer to the origin of the universe, cosmos, human beings, and kingdoms. From these narrations came new modified ones that kept the archetypes and that were adopted by the population of Mesoamerica. Mythical conceptions of history ended with La Conquista due to the imposition of the western canon, which was regulated by Christian principles. It was mostly written by evangelizing friars who were concerned on the eternal salvation promised by Christian church. Likewise, stories written by chroniclers and historians, who were paid by the Spanish Crown, proliferated. According to their perspectives, it is the Castilian kingdom the principal agent. During colonial epoch, the Ttulos primordiales were documents made and used by rural communities in order to protect or to recover their land rights. From Florescanos point of view, those ttulos give expression to the history, memory, and worries of the indigenous agencies. Their dialogism with oral and official sources integrates myths regarding to the origin of the villages as well as their rights of land property. Even though they were considered as a Most of the

falsification, they can be read as a creation to testify villages historical memory.

colonial historical canon used to be indifferent to the diversity of narrations and history constructed by others, those ones that were also in the same territory. By ignoring the others memory, it was not conceivable to imagine a historical discourse that includes the diversity of vision of world from New Spains inhabitants. On the contrary, during the 19th century criollos patriotism incorporated indigenous past and Spanish roots in order to develop an organic identity with New Spains territory. The independence movement was pushed by the establishment of symbols to represent nationhood. However, the post-independence period did not contribute to make the symbols look coherent;

they tried to consolidate indigenous as well as Spanish representations and heritages, but they were irreconcilable in the political scenario. Cultural consensus was as impossible as political consensus. To make a history that put together opposed narrations of the past was an achievement during the administration of Porfirio Daz. The canonic text Mxico a travs de los siglos (1880), written in the typical format of the Modernity, is a encyclopedia that compiles the Historia general y complete del desenvolvimiento social, politico, religioso, military, artistic, cientfico y literario de Mxico desde la antigedad ms remota hasta la poca actual(352). This project was directed by Vicente Riva Palacio, and intellectuals from different political orientations collaborated with its production, which represented a unifier attitude. Therefore, Mxico a travs de los siglos became a new historiographic canon. The Mexican Revolution destabilized the notion of national unity. Opposed political and social projects as well as the support of Mexicans peasants to different revolutionary tendencies, pushed leaders of the nation to get involved in an educative program, which could elaborate a history where opposition looked harmonious. Mexican muralists played a key role in portraying the unity of the Mexican ethnicity through the representation of popular masses and indigenous people. That new iconographic historical discourse tended to show the archetypes of the

Mexican Revolution: populism, democracy, and nationalism. Florescano deduces that historiography has been determined by forces like authority of producers and credibility of audiences, desire for objectivity, and the relativity of procedures of representation. The Mexican historiographic canon tended to be academic, and undermined the importance of collective memory. The author worries about the contemporary methods, The pessimism

procedures and institutions that promote historical teaching and research.

regarding to current conditions of historiography leads to conclude that historiographic production is subject to a vertical relation of power and, even more la mayor crisis intellectual que hoy vive la disciplina de la historia radica en su incapacidad para ofrecer a la nacion una historia de la nacion(449). Historia de las historias de la nacion Mexicana(2002) is based on the notion of canon as predominant historiographic productions. Florescano recalls on the relationship between construction of identity and narration of the past. The book demonstrates that even in the historiographic canon it is not possible to find a static image of Mexico, because the circumstances of historiographic production have been very dynamic and dependent of external influences, and political projects.